Cover not available
Article published In:
Processing in Bilingual Children
Edited by Chantal van Dijk, Jasmijn E. Bosch and Sharon Unsworth
[Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 14:4] 2024
► pp. 446–475

Bilingual children’s online processing of relative clauses

Evidence from heritage Greek

ORCID logo | University of Kaiserslautern-Landau
ORCID logo | University of Cologne
ORCID logo | University of Kaiserslautern-Landau
Long-distance dependencies such as relative clauses (RCs) are known to be vulnerable in heritage grammars (e.g., Montrul, 2008). Previous studies in RC comprehension have shown that heritage language (HL) children show similar comprehension to monolingual children (Jia & Paradis, 2020), while differential performance has also been found (Kidd et al., 2015). The present study investigates 11–13-year-old monolingual and German-dominant HL children’s real-time parsing strategies in subject relative clause (SRC) and object relative clause (ORC) processing in Greek. We conducted a self-paced listening task in Greek in which we manipulated the type of RC (subject vs. object), and the RC internal word order (canonical vs. scrambled). Our analyses revealed no significant group differences between HL and monolingual children. Both groups of children processed SRCs faster than ORCs on the critical RC verb segment. We also examined if case-marked pre-verbal NPs would facilitate the processing of ORC structures. Although children processed pre-verbal faster than post-verbal NPs, ORC structures with pre-verbal NPs received the lowest scores in the grammaticality judgment task. We discuss these findings on the grounds of Relativized Minimality (Friedmann et al., 2009) and Fodor and Inoue’s (2000) Diagnosis and Repair Model.
Keywords: heritage language, child processing, relative clauses, Greek, word order
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1On the SRC vs. ORC processing asymmetry
    • 1.2RC processing in HL children
    • 1.3Relative clause comprehension in Greek
  • 2.The present study
  • 3.Method
    • 3.1Participants
    • 3.2Assessing HL children’s vocabulary and grammatical knowledge
      • 3.2.1Vocabulary: Peabody picture vocabulary test (PPVT)
      • 3.2.2Reception of grammar – German version of TROG
      • 3.2.3Reception of grammar – Greek developmental verbal intelligence quotient (DVIQ)
      • 3.2.4Reception of grammar results: German TROG-D and Greek DVIQ
      • 3.2.5Self-paced listening task
    • 3.3Procedure
    • 3.4Pre-processing of the self-paced listening task data
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Self-paced listening task
    • 4.2Grammaticality judgments
  • 5.Discussion and conclusion
  • Competing interests
  • Data availability
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 18 April 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.22103.kat
References (83)
References
Adani, F., van der Lely, H. K. J., Forgiarini, M., & Guasti, M. T. (2010). Grammatical feature dissimilarities make relative clauses easier: A comprehension study with Italian children. Lingua, 120 (9), 2148–2166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Angelopoulos, N., Geronikou, E., & Terzi, A. (2022). Locality and intervention in the acquisition of Greek relative clauses. Languages, 7 (4), 275. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arosio, F., Yatsushiro, K., Forgiarini, M., & Guasti, M. T. (2012). Morphological information and memory resources in children’s processing of relative clauses in German. Language Learning and Development, 8 (4), 340–364. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed – effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59 1, 390–412. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68 (3), 255–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67 (1), 1–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, E., Devescovi, A., & D’Amico, S. (1999). Processing complex sentences: A cross-linguistic study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14 (1), 69–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benţea, A. (2012). Does ‘case’ matter in the acquisition of relative clauses in Romanian? In A. Biller, E. Chung, & A. Kimball (Eds.), BUCLD 36 Online Proceedings Supplement. [URL]
Bishop, D. V. M. (1989). Test for the Reception of Grammar (TROG), Version 2. Medical Research Council. [URL]
Booth, J. R., Mac Whinney, B., & Harasaki, Y. (2000). Developmental differences in visual and auditory processing of complex sentences. Child Development, 71 (4), 981–1003. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Catsimali, G. (1990). Case in Modern Greek: Implications for clause structure [Ph.D. Thesis]. University of Reading.
Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chondrogianni, V. (2008). The Acquisition of Determiners and Clitic Pronouns by Child and Adult L2 learners of Greek. Unpublished PhD dissertation [Unpublished PhD dissertation]. University of Cambridge.
Chondrogianni, V., & Marinis, T. (2012). Production and processing asymmetries in the acquisition of tense morphology by sequential bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15 (1), 5–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chondrogianni, V., & Schwartz, R. G. (2020). Case marking and word order in Greek heritage children. Journal of Child Language, 47 (4), 766–795. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corrêa, L. M. S. (1995). An alternative assessment of children’s comprehension of relative clauses. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 24 (3), 183–203. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coşkun Kunduz, A., & Montrul, S. (2024). Relative clauses in child heritage speakers of Turkish in the United States. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 14 ( 2 ), 218–254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cuza, A., & Miller, L. (2015). The protracted acquisition of past tense aspectual values in child heritage Spanish. In R. Klassen, J. M. Liceras, & E. Valenzuela (Eds.), Hispanic Linguistics at the Crossroad: Theoretical Linguistics, Language Acquisition and Language Contact (pp. 2111–229). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, L. M. (1997). Peabody picture vocabulary test-III. American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
Finney, M. C., Montgomery, J. W., Gillam, R. B., & Evans, J. L. (2014). Role of working memory storage and attention focus switching in children’s comprehension of spoken object relative sentences. Child Development Research, 2014, 1–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J. D., & Inoue, A. (2000). Syntactic features in reanalysis: Positive and negative symptoms. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29 (1), 25–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fox, A. V. (2006). TROG-D (Test zur Überprüfung des Grammatikverständnisses) [Test for Reception of Grammar-German]. Schulz-Kirchner.Google Scholar
Friedmann, N., Belletti, A., & Rizzi, L. (2009). Relativized relatives: Types of intervention in the acquisition of A-bar dependencies. Lingua, 119 (1), 67–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gennari, S. P., & MacDonald, M. C. (2008). Semantic indeterminacy in object relative clauses. Journal of Memory and Language, 58 (4), 161–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68 (1), 1–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., & Johnson, M. (2001). Memory interference during language processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27 1, 1411–1423. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grodner, D., & Gibson, E. (2005). Consequences of the serial nature of linguistic input for sentenial complexity. Cognitive Science, 29 (2), 261–291. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guasti, M. T., Stavrakaki, S., & Arosio, F. (2012). Cross-linguistic differences and similarities in the acquisition of relative clauses: Evidence from Greek and Italian. Lingua, 122 (6), 700–713. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guasti, M., Vernice, M., & Franck, J. (2018). Continuity in the adult and children’s comprehension of subject and object relative clauses in French and Italian. Languages, 3 (3), 24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, L. (1994). Verb raising as verb projection raising- some empirical problems. Linguistic Inquiry, 25 (3), 509–522.Google Scholar
Haznedar, B. (1997). L2 acquisition by a Turkish-speaking child: Evidence for L1 influence. In M. Hughes, E. Hughes, & A. Greenhill (Eds.), Proceedings of the Boston University Conference on Language Development 21 1 (pp. 245–256). Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Horrocks, G. (1994). Subjects and configurationality: Modern Greek clause structure. Journal of Linguistics, 30 (1), 81–109. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jia, R., & Paradis, J. (2015). The use of referring expressions in narratives by Mandarin heritage language children and the role of language environment factors in predicting individual differences. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18 (4), 737–752. Cambridge Core. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2020). The acquisition of relative clauses by Mandarin heritage language children. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 10 (2), 153–183. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kas, B., & Lukács, Á. (2012). Processing relative clauses by Hungarian typically developing children. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27 (4), 500–538. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Katsika, K., Lialiou, M., & Allen, S. E. M. (2022). The influence of case and word order in child and adult processing of relative clauses in Greek. Languages, 7 (3), 206. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kidd, E., & Bavin, E. L. (2002). English-speaking children’s comprehension of relative clauses: Evidence for general-cognitive and language-specific constraints on development. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 31 1, 599–617. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kidd, E., Chan, A., & Chiu, J. (2015). Cross-linguistic influence in simultaneous Cantonese–English bilingual children’s comprehension of relative clauses. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18 (3), 438–452. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, K., O’Grady, W., & Schwartz, B. D. (2018). Case in heritage Korean. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 8 (2), 252–282. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest Package: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82 (13), 1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lau, E., & Tanaka, N. (2021). The subject advantage in relative clauses: A review. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 6 (1), 34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lenhard, A., Lenhard, W., Segerer, R., & Suggate, S. (2015). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test – Revision IV (Deutsche Adaption). Pearson Assessment GmbH, Frankfurt a. Main.Google Scholar
Lenth, R. V., Buerkner, P., Herve, M., Love, J., Miguez, F., Riebl, H., & Singmann, H. (2022). Emmeans: Estimated Marginal Means, Aka Least-Squares Means.Google Scholar
Levy, R., Fedorenko, E., & Gibson, E. (2013). The syntactic complexity of Russian relative clauses. Journal of Memory and Language, 69 (4), 461–495. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mak, W. M., Vonk, W., & Schriefers, H. (2002). The influence of animacy on relative clause processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 47 1, 50–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006). Animacy in processing relative clauses: The hikers that rocks crush. Journal of Memory and Language, 54 (4), 466–490. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meng, M., & Bader, M. (2000). Ungrammaticality detection and garden path strength: Evidence for serial parsing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15 1, 615–666. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S. (2004). Subject and object expression in Spanish heritage speakers: A case of morphosyntactic convergence. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7(2), 125–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016). The Acquisition of Heritage Languages. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Grady, W., Lee, M., & Choo, M. (2003). A subject-object asymmetry in the acquisition of relative clauses in Korean as a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25 (3), 433–448. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Özge, D., Kornfilt, J., Maquate, K., Küntay, A. C., & Snedeker, J. (2022). German-speaking children use sentence-initial case marking for predictive language processing at age four. Cognition, 221 1, 104988. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Özsoy, O., Iefremenko, K., & Schroeder, C. (2022). Shifting and expanding clause combining strategies in heritage Turkish varieties. Languages, 7 1, 242. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Polinsky, M. (1997). American Russian: language loss meets language acquisition. In W. Browne, E. Dornisch, N. Kondrashova, & D. Zec (Eds.), Annual workshop on formal approaches to Slavic linguistics: The Cornell meeting (1995) (pp. 370–406), Ann Arbor, MI: Slavic Publishers.Google Scholar
(2011). Reanalysis in adult heritage language: A case for attrition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 331, 305–328. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). Heritage Languages and Their Speakers (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [URL]
Reali, F., & Christiansen, M. H. (2007). Processing of relative clauses is made easier by frequency of occurrence. Journal of Memory and Language, 57 1, 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, L. (1990). Relativized Minimality. The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rothman, J. (2009). Understanding the nature and outcomes of early bilingualism: Romance languages as heritage languages. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13 1, 155–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2012). E-Prime 2.0. [Computer software and manual]. Psychology Software Tools Inc.Google Scholar
Silva-Corvalan, C. (1994). Language Contact and Change: Spanish in Los Angeles. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simos, P. G., Sideridis, G. D., Protopapas, A., & Mouzaki, A. (2011). Psychometric evaluation of a receptive vocabulary test for Greek elementary students. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 37 (1), 34–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (1973). Cognitive prerequisites for the development of grammar (C. A. Ferguson & D. I. Slobin, Eds.). Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
Starke, M. (2001). Move Dissolves into Merge: A Theory of Locality [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Geneva.
Stathopoulou, N. (2007). Producing relative clauses in Greek: Evidence from Down Syndrome. In Essex Graduate Student Paper on Language and Linguistics (pp. 104–125).Google Scholar
Stavrakaki, S. (2001). Comprehension of reversible relative clauses in specifically language impaired and normally developing Greek children. Brain and Language, 77 (3), 419–431. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stavrakaki, S., Tasioudi, M., & Guasti, T. (2015). Morphological cues in the comprehension of relative clauses by Greek children with specific language impairment and typical development: A comparative study. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 17 (6), 617–626. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stavrakaki, S., & Tsimpli, I. M. (2000). Diagnostic verbal IQ test for Greek preschool and school age children: Standardization, statistical analysis, psychometric properties. Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Speech Therapy, 95–106.Google Scholar
Theodorou, E., & Grohmann, K. K. (2013). The acquisition of relative clauses in Cypriot Greek: Production and comprehension. Diacritica, 26 1, 271–300.Google Scholar
Traxler, M. J., Morris, R. K., & Seely, R. E. (2002). Processing subject and object relative clauses: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 47 (1), 69–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traxler, M. J., Williams, R. S., Blozis, S. A., & Morris, R. K. (2005). Working memory, animacy, and verb class in the processing of relative clauses. Journal of Memory and Language, 53 (2), 204–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsehaye, W., Pashkova, T., Tracy, R., & Allen, S. E. M. (2021). Deconstructing the native speaker: Further evidence from heritage speakers for why this horse should be dead! Frontiers in Psychology, 12 1, 717352. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsimpli, I. M. (1990). Clause structure and word order in Modern Greek. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 2 1, 220–258.Google Scholar
Tsoi, E. Y. L., Yang, W., Chan, A., & Kidd, E. (2019). Mandarin–English speaking bilingual and Mandarin speaking monolingual children’s comprehension of relative clauses. Applied Psycholinguistics, 40 (4). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tzanidaki, D. I. (1995). Greek word order: Towards a new approach. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 7 1, 247–277.Google Scholar
(1998). Clause structure and word order in Modern Greek. In B. D. Joseph, G. C. Horrocks, & I. Philippaki-Warburton (Eds.), Current Issues in Linguistic Theory (pp. 159–229). John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Unsworth, S. (2005). Comparing Child L1, Child L2 and Adult L2. Doctoral Dissertation. Utrecht University.
van Dijk, C., van Wonderen, E., Koutamanis, E., Kootstra, G. J., Dijkstra, T., & Unsworth, S. (2022). Cross-linguistic influence in simultaneous and early sequential bilingual children: A meta-analysis. Journal of Child Language, 49 (5), 897–929. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Varlokosta, S. (1997). The acquisition of relative clauses in Modern Greek: A movement account. In A. Sorace, C. Heycock, & R. Shillcock (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition, (pp. 184–187).Google Scholar
Whong-Barr, M., & Schwartz, B. D. (2002). Morphological and syntactic transfer in child L2 acquisition of the English dative alternation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24 1, 579–616. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wickham, H. (2016). ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer-Verlag New York. [URL]. DOI logo
Yip, V., & Matthews, S. (2007). Relative clauses in Cantonese-English bilingual children: Typological challenges and processing motivations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29 (2), 277–300. Cambridge Core. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Golegos, Angelika & Theodoros Marinis
2024. Greek as a Heritage Language in Germany. Languages 9:12 ► pp. 370 ff. DOI logo
van Dijk, Chantal, Jasmijn Bosch & Sharon Unsworth
2024. Language processing in bilingual children. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 14:4 ► pp. 435 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 december 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.